 Hey guys it's Leanna and I'm here today to talk about adaptations that were better than the book. I kind of got this idea talking to my patrons on our discord. We were kind of talking about movies that we like better than the books that they are based on and I also saw Jashana do something similar quite recently. I'll leave her video links down below. Great minds think alike. Most of the list is movies but I do have a couple that were series tv shows or mini series. Are any of them mini series? Yeah one of those mini series. And I didn't do this on purpose but this is a list of 10 which was kind of perfect and I yeah but they aren't ranked or anything so I didn't like go through and go like worst to best or best to worst or anything like that so this isn't like it's just the order that I wrote them down and it's 10. Starting with perhaps the most controversial one on my list. The one that I most anticipate having people disagree with me so may as well start there and then get everybody pissed off at the start so you can click off the video early without wasting your time. That is The Goldfinch. I am a huge huge fan of The Secret History by Donna Tartt so I was very excited to read The Goldfinch and I was quite disappointed with The Goldfinch. The book. I talked about it more in my reading wrap up in the month that I read The Goldfinch so I'll leave that link down below if you want to check that out. I don't have a standalone review for it mainly because like I didn't feel that strongly about it and it would be negative so I was like eh. I did the the movie was available to watch on Prime so I didn't have to pay for it and I'd heard it kind of universally panned and after not really loving the book I was very curious and didn't have to pay extra for it so I was like why not and the movie was quite good. I don't think it's not like an all-time favorite movie or anything like it's not a movie that like I go out of my way to watch again although I would watch it again but I thought the movie did a really good job adopting the book for one so if we're just like basing our judgment off of how loyal it is to the book the movie is very loyal to the book so I don't know how anyone could be mad at the movie if they were coming at it from that perspective of like this was nothing like the book it's very true to the book so from that perspective like they did a good job and then a lot of the things that like I did end up like looking up some reviews you'd be like what was people's problem with this a lot of the problems people had with the movie I was like did you read the book because like that's what the book is like so don't blame the movie then you just don't like this story but that's what the book does that's what it's like uh things like characters being kind of two dimensional or being kind of stereotypes um things like that to be completely frank I think that the way that the characters are portrayed by their actors gives them a lot more depth than nuance than what is actually present on the page in the book the goldfinch like just by virtue of having living breathing actors embody these roles brings a lot of dimension to the characters that is completely absent in the book so do I think they are the most nuanced characters ever in the movie no but coming off of reading the book by comparison by contrast I think they're better than the movie the movie's very well cast I think ansel egg something the dude who plays uh the main character of the goldfinch I think he does a great job he's the I think is a good choice for the role also the actor who plays his uh friend he's kind of one of the ones that are kind of more of a stereotype kind of almost an offensive stereotype in the book this actor was also in duncirk I don't know I think I feel like he's an actor to watch because I've liked him in everything that I've seen him in Nicole Kidman was excellent uh everyone in it it was it was really good and I thought it was really beautifully shot and I thought it was evoking the kind of like philosophical poetical kind of vibe that the book was kind of going after and I think the choice in the film to tell it non-linearly to kind of cut from the present to the past it created a lot more structure and a lot more like sense of directionality for the film the movie just kind of like what did I say the movie did I say okay the movie does that well the book because it's all told completely linearly there's this this like okay where are we going with this what's the point of this but there is this kind of like faded feel to the movie because we kind of know not the entire end but like more towards the end where this is kind of going and it creates that kind of like towards zero kind of feeling that I think helps you feel more invested in what's going on at least for me so I think the movie is way better next I have stardust this is a book by Neil Gaiman and that's coming from me a huge huge fan of Neil Gaiman but in my opinion the movie stardust is a lot more fun a lot more interesting a lot more whimsical a lot more engaging than the book stardust stardust is probably one of my least favorite things Neil Gaiman's ever written I just feel like for a writer that is so gifted at like creating magic at making things feel extraordinary and more than somehow him actually writing a fairy tale feels really non-magical it is entirely devoid of any sense of wonder at whimsy which is kind of strange whereas I think the film does a really good job both with wonder and whimsy and also weaving in some really lovely humor kind of a la princes bride which is on the list too so I have a lot of fun with the movie and the book it just pales in comparison the movie has so much life so much vibrancy the book is like so so forgettable I'm glad he wrote it because it gives a great movie but I wouldn't recommend reading it especially if you've never read Gaiman before don't start with stardust just watch the movie uh next up I have the princess bride that movie like I feel like everybody at least of my generation has seen that movie more times than they can count and probably can quote the whole thing and I think once again the actors the way they play those characters brought a lot more depth to nuance and heart to the roles the way that they are written in the book it's funny a lot of the kind of like satirical humor is there um but it's lacking warmth the book is it doesn't have a lot of warmth the characters are kind of more like the characters themselves are a joke which I don't really care for I think there's a lot of funny stuff that happens in the movie but you still really feel for the characters the characters themselves aren't a joke if that makes sense we're not kind of like laughing at their expense I mean sometimes we are but it feels more like you're laughing with them a bit not entirely but like a more that way the book just feels like it's it's lacking soul lacking heart so it's not I mean the movie is fairly similar to the book like it's not like wildly different but there's just so much more warmth the actors playing the roles like they make them really like people that you root for and care about as opposed to the characters in the book where I mean it it's it's funny but like you don't really like feel anything for that at least I didn't next up I have the two towers I didn't say the whole lord of the rings trilogy and I didn't say the fellowship of the ring because I haven't finished reading the trilogy I've only read fellowship in two towers and in my review for fellowship and I stand by that that I felt that for fellowship it was kind of different but equal like they have very different strong suits but what one lacks the other possesses and vice versa so a lot of my review of fellowship was me kind of going through like things that like I went in expecting or like might where it was colored by having seen the movie a lot but that there's things in the books that the movie just doesn't have and so I think it kind of like evens out two towers is my favorite of the lord of the rings movies so that was like the highest bar to clear and it didn't so the two towers movie I think both because it tells it once again kind of like a goldfinch where like they cut the plot lines together so you're not just doing Rohan and just doing the Frodo and Sam stuff it's kind of like spliced together so you go back and forth gives more movement and more it keeps things from stagnating so that choice alone then obviously like the battle of helms deep which is like the greatest battle in cinema history in my opinion and it's like it's like a paragraph I might be exaggerating but it's like barely in the book which I kind of was like I don't having read fellowship I don't really see Tolkien writing an extended battle sequence and two towers looks kind of short no I was correct not really a battle sequence I definitely enjoy the two towers movie way more I think this it's paced better structured better I like the choice to I mean spoilers I guess for the lord of the rings but I like the choice to cut off two towers where the film does and to take the end of two towers that's not spoilery because I didn't say what happens to take what happens the end of two towers and to put that into the last argument of kings the return of the king I think that works better in terms of like what things like should be an ancient installment I think cutting it that cutting it up that way without actually changing the plot just moving it over into return of the king I think it flows better I think it makes sense to do that so a plus Peter Jackson next up I have the prestige this is what I've talked about on my channel before I did a whole video comparing the movie and the book I do think the book is good I really do but the movie is better and the movie wouldn't be possible on the book because the book is a very original concept and so credit where it's due the book is a very original idea and it is executed fairly well but I think Christopher Nolan took an excellent idea and like built upon it and improved upon it perfected it and made it something truly great because the movie the prestige is so excellent it's so excellent and it has a lot of the subtlety that the book surprisingly lacks a lot of the time like a lot of stuff in the book I was like this can't be as obvious as it seems right I feel like it's trying to do like these like subtle hints showing you things without showing you except like the book it feels to me very much like someone going where's Christopher Nolan it's an absolute masterclass in how to show the audience something and even tell the audience that you're showing them something without them noticing it without them picking up on it and then still being surprised at the end oh chef's kiss and like the rewatchability of that movie that movie's one of the greatest movies of all time it's so so good but again like a lot of the credit like the groundwork was done by the author but this setup this concept was developed by the author and Christopher Nolan then just kind of like made it better but I can't credit Christopher Nolan for the idea for like a lot of the the meat of the the tofu of the story but he he definitely made it better this is a situation where he had the medium of film also made a lot of things possible that I mean the book could still be written better than it is but a lot of things that Christopher Nolan is able to pull off he's able to pull it off because it's film and film can do things the books cannot and vice versa so absolutely excellent if you haven't seen the prestige you should see it it's so good uh next I have the turn of the screw and haunting of blind manor I this is very very loose in adaptation but technically the haunting of blind manor is an adaptation of the turn of the screw and I really love the haunting of blind manor and the turn of the screw I get why it's a classic I get why papers are written on it I get why lit classes would dissect it because there is a lot to dissect but as reading enjoyment story enjoyment no I really did not care for the turn of the screw as a story about people it's it's not very good in my opinion it's more interested it well it's I don't really feel like it's interested in telling a story about people which you know fair play like if that's not what it's trying to do I can't really like knock it points for not doing a thing that it wasn't really even trying to do but the haunting of blind manor is an incredibly character driven adaptation and I think it handles a lot of similar themes that the book originally does but expands upon them and does more with them and then still also tells an incredibly heart-wrenching character story and I chef's kiss haunting of blind manor also if you haven't seen it watch it and I if you're curious the turn of the screw isn't very long and it is such a classic that like I guess it's worth kind of like seeing what it's all about but I wouldn't pick it up if you're looking for a good time next I have the 39 steps this also kind of talked about when I back when I read the book I'd I would sit for this it's not just one particular adaptation both adaptations that I've seen of the 39 steps are really really different from each other and from the book and they are both better than the book the book is not very good and I was so shocked by how about the book was after seeing two wildly different adaptations both of which were way better the hitchcock adaptation in black and white is a really fun old Hitchcock movie that I think I mean I like black and white movies I like old movies um and if you like old movies I recommend it it's a fun one and then the adaptation the new adaptation that was done I think for like BBC or ITV or something like that with Rupert Henry Jones is uh much more modern obviously not just in terms of like you know technical aspects but also be like added more modern elements and modern sensibilities to the story and actually amazingly both but even back in Hitchcock's time he did this and now in the new adaptation they also did this which made me think this was part of the book and I was shocked that it wasn't because both adaptations did this added a female character that goes kind of on this like espionage like adventure with the main male character there's a female character that becomes involved in the Hitchcock one and there's a female character that becomes involved in the new one and the female character that becomes involved in each of them is really different and kind of comes into it for different reasons um which is why I kind of assumed that like oh well then the newer version is probably the more accurate version and then like the old Hollywood version they just kind of like did something different with the female character because they did that a lot back then but no she just doesn't exist that's just like not a thing in the book there is no female character the book is like it's I've read a lot of dated books I've read a lot of classics 39 steps is so incredibly dated it's kind of painful so I recommend the Hitchcock movie I recommend the the TV adaptation the miniseries I think it was I was either made for TV movie or miniseries both are really good don't read the book don't waste your time next on my list is the Count of Monte Cristo I do really like the book but the movie I watched a lot and the movie changes something really kind of critical about actually changes two things one is less of a spoiler so I will explain it the other is a major spoiler so I won't say what it is but if you've seen it and if you've read the book then you know exactly what it is and I really approve of both changes I think both changes improve the story a lot and they do change the kind of takeaway I guess the message I like the movie better so the change that I will talk about or that I can talk about is that in the book and in the movie there are basically three people that Edmond Dantes holds responsible for his imprisonment in the Chateau d'oeuvre and that is true in both however in the movie it is predominantly one and then the other two are kind of like also people that did him wrong but the revenge and the like animosity is really between Edmond and Fernand whereas in the book it's not really like specifically Fernand it's more equal where like all three of these people did him wrong for different reasons so he's going to get back at them individually and it's just so much more personal and poignant and heartbreaking the fallout between Edmond and Fernand in the movie because there's just such a so much greater personal betrayal there so it just I feel like it's more it gets you more invested as the viewer by doing it that way and then there's another change that is made in the movie which again I won't say what it is because it's a big spoiler so I won't say what it is but again if you've read the book and if you've seen the movie you know what it is and I like that change a lot next up is the discovery of witches or a discovery of witches at first I kind of thought the book might be slightly better than the show and then the second book was just such complete garbage and then the second season of the show was like fine so these books like I mean yeah but I forgave a lot in the first one because I was like maybe you'll get better maybe it's a rough story it only gets worse it's this really like angsty romance which like you know going into it but it's just done in a way that isn't compelling to me that it's just really aggravating and frustrating and it makes me dislike the characters and it's really repetitive like the drama between them it's just so repetitive and so the show like it keeps things clipping along at a faster pace it waves in plot lines that I suspect come into the books later because they're not really in the books yet and also the books are all told from the main female characters perspective so you really wouldn't get to jump around like that whereas the show will kind of show you stuff that's going on elsewhere with related parties and what the villains are up to and what her aunties are up to etc so it keeps it more interesting you know just like stuck in her head all the time and then a lot of you know it's you know it's beautiful sweeping scenery a good soundtrack wonderful costumes the actors once again that's kind of like the main like recurring thing here where the actors really take a character that's like uh and give it life or give it perspective or give it more depth or warmth or heart or whatever it is like that the actors improve it so I do like uh Matthew Goods portrayal of the character better than the character as written I love James Purefoy in the second season which like I gloke he watched the second season because I knew James Purefoy would be in it and like you could ask my mom well you can't because you don't know her the whole time we were watching the second season I was like is this the episode he's in it who's he gonna play is he gonna play this person where are we gonna see James Purefoy and then finally when we were getting to the episode where we were gonna meet him she was like well are you ready because it's finally happening I'm like I am not ready the if the show is just like it's not the best show I've ever seen I'm not gonna say you should like absolutely go out of your way to watch it but the show is a good time it's beautiful to look at it's fun it's exciting and adventurous and stuff goes on the books are insufferable the first one is less insufferable the book the first book is tolerable the second book is is why just why and last is Outlander and Outlander is a similar situation to Discovery of Witches but less less extreme because I didn't really like the first Outlander book I started reading the second one at DNF but this was back before booktube like now I probably would finish it like because the second Outlander book was definitely seeming better than the second Discovery of Witches book so it's by no means worse I just back then I was like I'm not feeling it so I would DNF it because I wasn't revealing it for anyone but Outlander is a similar problem to Discovery of Witches where like it's all told basically from her perspective and her internal thoughts are really obnoxious and really annoying insufferable infuriating and make me really dislike her as a character and in the show well one you're not going to get the internal model of any character her is in particular the actress that plays her name escapes me Catriona Balf I think but she I think I mean it's also to do with how the screenwriters wrote the character they've made subtle changes the relationship that she has with Jamie the way it's all portrayed it's the less extreme less exaggerated less dramatic it just seems more much and the show still does piss me off sometimes uh and it's another situation where like we're not just in her head the whole time we do kind of see other things happening it's beautifully shot there's lovely music wonderful costumes so it's just kind of like a lot that you can enjoy beyond just like the internal monologue of like an obnoxious heroine so the show is a lot more fun to watch than the books were or the book and a quarter that I actually read so yeah that's my list of adaptations that were better than their books let me know in the comments down below if you feel the same way or feel totally differently if there are others that you feel this way about that I didn't talk about movies that you thought were better than the book um or of the ones I did talk about if you thought that the book was actually better and that I'm wrong I'm sure you've already started letting me know that whatever you want to let me know I post videos on saturdays other random times as well but that's me saturdays so like and subscribe join my patreon if you feel so inclined and I'll see you when I see you bye